Perfecting English Old Fashioned Wideplay

[shaunwwfc]

I have longed to perfect this kind of football in FM so much to the point where it is actually effecting me really badly! Somebody PLEASE for my sanity help me on this. Its very bad that over the past 3 editions I have spent more time fiddling around with the TC, browsing forums trying to get this system working than playing the game. I honestly haven't played over 2 seasons worth because of this obsession - now is this really how SI wants me to play this game? I would really hope not.

I have been brought up on football that is played down the flanks, a solid team that soaks up pressure then hits the ball out wide and let's there wide players hug the touchline, beat his man, then stick over a lovely cross for its two CFs to pounce on. FM doesnt, for whatever reason, want me to play like this. The team that did it best most recently was Aston Villa under MoN, or during periods Stoke under Pulls.

So far I have

Rigid

Counter

More Direct

Zonal

Float Crosses

Stick to Position

Attack down both flanks

Counter ticked

I play with no playmaker or target man. I play a solid back 4 all of whom are on defend but get my full back to cross often from deep. I then play with another solid bank of 4 in midfield, however my 2 CMs are both on defend duty, one being a deep lying playmaker, another being central midfielder. The idea is that these two sit and protect when my widemen go off on one and spray passes out to the wingers. My Wingers are both exactly that on attack duty, with the TC they don't roam because I have found when they do they cut inside far too much and they literally hug the touchline, look to beat there man and whip crosses in. The aim is centre and I also have them crossing from 'mixed' reason being I want them to whip crosses in at every available opportunity. My two frontman are Target man attack and advanced forward. You may argue one of these should be on support but inevitably my play is going through the flanks and I want them in good positions when crosses come in.

So what do you reckon? Is my template wrong? Should I be a different philosophy altogether? Am I too defensive? Should my full backs be higher up the pitch? Please please please anything you can think of suggest.

[SJ234]

I am not convinced by how you have set up. I would say Man U have been a good example of traditional English wide play and they would always have a striker dropping deep otherwise the strikers become isolated. I would also want a box to box midfielder as I think that would help add some dynamism to your midfield through the middle. Also I think full backs on support would be better than both on defend as that would help add an extra layer to your attack and some great complexity to your wide play.

Also untick anything you have ticked on the TC.

[KevMaaan]

You are going to have to tell us your formation and player roles so we can give you better help, its all well and good saying you use a "rigid" philosophy, but what philosophy you use is linked in with how many "specialist roles" you intend on using.

[shaunwwfc]

You are going to have to tell us your formation and player roles so we can give you better help, its all well and good saying you use a "rigid" philosophy, but what philosophy you use is linked in with how many "specialist roles" you intend on using.

If you read my post in more depth I have actually outlined the roles.

[SpartyOn]

If I follow right, you don't have a single support duty in your team! The 4 attack duties are going to be miles apart from the 6 defend duties. I know you want to focus on wide play, but your wingers won't be able to get a good cross in 100% of the time they have the ball. When they can't get space to cross, they're going to need passing options, but there won't be anyone near them.

Both fullbacks should be on support. They'll still play fairly defensively, but will come up to offer a bail-out option for the wingers. I'd also put one of the CMs on support, and the target man on support to help link up midfield and attack. A TM/S will still try to get on the end of crosses and can still score lots of goals.

Speaking of the target man, why isn't he set as your target man? You want to have specialization in a rigid philosophy, so if you've got a big target man, let him play like one. Set him as the target man and aim the crosses at him (this will happen automatically if you don't tick any boxes and set crossing to default).

In general, I wouldn't recommend ticking the boxes and overriding TC defaults. Instead, use shouts. Instead of just focusing passing down the flanks, shout "exploit the flanks." Instead of setting the wingers to cross from mixed manually to get them to cross more, use "hit early crosses". The shouts will make other changes to the tactic that help everything flow how you want it to.

[shaunwwfc]

If I follow right, you don't have a single support duty in your team! The 4 attack duties are going to be miles apart from the 6 defend duties. I know you want to focus on wide play, but your wingers won't be able to get a good cross in 100% of the time they have the ball. When they can't get space to cross, they're going to need passing options, but there won't be anyone near them.

Both fullbacks should be on support. They'll still play fairly defensively, but will come up to offer a bail-out option for the wingers. I'd also put one of the CMs on support, and the target man on support to help link up midfield and attack. A TM/S will still try to get on the end of crosses and can still score lots of goals.

Speaking of the target man, why isn't he set as your target man? You want to have specialization in a rigid philosophy, so if you've got a big target man, let him play like one. Set him as the target man and aim the crosses at him (this will happen automatically if you don't tick any boxes and set crossing to default).

In general, I wouldn't recommend ticking the boxes and overriding TC defaults. Instead, use shouts. Instead of just focusing passing down the flanks, shout "exploit the flanks." Instead of setting the wingers to cross from mixed manually to get them to cross more, use "hit early crosses". The shouts will make other changes to the tactic that help everything flow how you want it to.

Thanks mate. All your suggestions sound very logical and could well work with the players I have. I will give this a try and report back. 2 questions though...

If I put the target man on support and set him as designated target man, won't that contradict? In the sense that crosses will automatically be set to him yet with support he will be deeper?

Secondly, I having one midfielder on support I understand, but which one? What partnership do you think would work best within this counter attackingm wideplay set up? Thanks in advance!

[KevMaaan]

If you read my post in more depth I have actually outlined the roles.

My apologies. If i understand correctly you are playing something like:

GK

FB CB CB FB

Winger DLP CM Winger

AF TM

As you are not using many specialist roles, i would bump your philosophy up to fluid as you need the team to be more creative with their basic roles, i would get your wingers to learn the PPM "hugs touchline" too. Have you considered using wingbacks? Im using them in the Serie A and they have literally won game son their own, they should be able to compliment your crossing strategy and provide passing options to your wingers when used with the shout "look for overlap", use them on support duty. The thing with your strategy is that you dont have a plan B is everything goes to pot. Its all well and good having 2 crouch type players in the box waiting for crosses, but if the opponent has a solid defence then high balls wont work as well. I would personally set your DLP to support, and perhaps your cm also to support. Ever thought of having a player like defoe on your bench just incase plan A fails? I know that isnt the pointof this thread, but even when you have your strategy perfected, against some teams it just wont work. Keep yourself tight in defence and stand off opponents instead of pressing them, when ive done this ive noticed my defence tend tokeep shape better and force the opposition into hit and hope long shots, resulting in gaining possession.

[SpartyOn]

Thanks mate. All your suggestions sound very logical and could well work with the players I have. I will give this a try and report back. 2 questions though...

If I put the target man on support and set him as designated target man, won't that contradict? In the sense that crosses will automatically be set to him yet with support he will be deeper?

Secondly, I having one midfielder on support I understand, but which one? What partnership do you think would work best within this counter attackingm wideplay set up? Thanks in advance!

From my experience with the TM/S, he'll play deeper when the ball is in the middle of the park, but when it goes out wide he'll still get into the box anticipating a cross.

As far the central midfielders, it depends on your players. I'd slightly favor DLP/S and CM/D I guess.

[shaunwwfc]

My apologies. If i understand correctly you are playing something like:

GK

FB CB CB FB

Winger DLP CM Winger

AF TM

As you are not using many specialist roles, i would bump your philosophy up to fluid as you need the team to be more creative with their basic roles, i would get your wingers to learn the PPM "hugs touchline" too. Have you considered using wingbacks? Im using them in the Serie A and they have literally won game son their own, they should be able to compliment your crossing strategy and provide passing options to your wingers when used with the shout "look for overlap", use them on support duty. The thing with your strategy is that you dont have a plan B is everything goes to pot. Its all well and good having 2 crouch type players in the box waiting for crosses, but if the opponent has a solid defence then high balls wont work as well. I would personally set your DLP to support, and perhaps your cm also to support. Ever thought of having a player like defoe on your bench just incase plan A fails? I know that isnt the pointof this thread, but even when you have your strategy perfected, against some teams it just wont work. Keep yourself tight in defence and stand off opponents instead of pressing them, when ive done this ive noticed my defence tend tokeep shape better and force the opposition into hit and hope long shots, resulting in gaining possession.

Just to clarify, my Team Instructions are now as follows:

Rigid

Counter

More Direct

Zonal Marking

Stick To Position

I am now letting the TC assign the relevant PM and TM roles with 'Mixed' supply for TM. Upon starting games I am using the shouts "Hit Early Crosses", "Get Ball Forward" & "Exploit the Flanks" upon suggested by SpartyOn.

My roles I now have are:

GK (D)

FB (S) CB (D) CB (D) FB (S)

RW (A) CM (D) DLP (S) LW (A)

TM (S) AF (A)

Plan B is something to think about once Plan A works to be honest!! ha. But I do certainly take your point.

You raise a point I have never thought about. In a 4-4-2 with two attack wingers I dont think I have ever tried two support central midfielders, I have always had at least 1 if not both of my central midfielders on defend. But with the counter strategy as good as meaning these two players will sit in terms of closing, it is something to try.

Would work ball into box compliment the current shouts I am using? In terms of not lumping it from distance and rather spraying passes out wide?

What would playing two deep lying playmakers results in do you think? Perhaps one defensive, one support?

Delighted with response and suggestions so far - please keep them coming!!!!

[KevMaaan]

The "basic" definition of a specialist role is in general, a role that explains a position, not a duty (fullback, winger, centre back etc) and the more specialised roles you have, the more rigid you must be, so looking at your setup you will probably benefit from a more fluid style of play. Have you set individual instructions for attacking set pieces? Have your tallest/strongest player mark the keeper for corners and FKs, and have a more technical player who can crack decent long shots "attack the ball from deep", scored so many goals this way, its unreal.

[shaunwwfc]

The "basic" definition of a specialist role is in general, a role that explains a position, not a duty (fullback, winger, centre back etc) and the more specialised roles you have, the more rigid you must be, so looking at your setup you will probably benefit from a more fluid style of play. Have you set individual instructions for attacking set pieces? Have your tallest/strongest player mark the keeper for corners and FKs, and have a more technical player who can crack decent long shots "attack the ball from deep", scored so many goals this way, its unreal.

Now that I have set these players (TM & PM) as these actual playmakers and targetmen within the tactic do you think Fluid is still the best thing to switch to?

[KevMaaan]

Yeah, fluidity of the team is just dependant on the individual roles on the tactic. Im trying to find where Wwfan spoke about philosophy, but i cant, thougb maybe if you sent him or Cleon a PM they may find time to explain it better than i can, they cant do a worse job im sure

Basically, a basic role, is what it says on the tin. Basic. Other roles (advanced playmaker, poacher, libero, box to box mf etc) are specialised roles, they are not there to do a number of things, they are there to specialise in ONE thing, therefore, if you play fluid with too many specialised roles, you are giving them the freedom to try and do things they are not suited to. Giving fluidity to a team of basic roles gives them the freedom they need to perform, as in theory, without a specialisation they aren't really doing anything. Basic play needs more creativity, specialised play needs more discipline.

Also, set your TM supply to head, he may give a few flick ons, or your crosses will be aimed at him.

[wwfan]

I'd query your strategy. Is "counter" really the best strategy for the fast, direct British 4-4-2? I'd argue it should be attacking, very fluid or fluid, no specialist roles other than a TM and (possibly) poacher.

I'd try this:

Philosophy: Fluid

Strategy: Attacking

Adjustments: Heavier Tackling, More Direct, Less Roaming

Roles/Duties:

GK/D

FB/S

LD/D

LD/D

FB/S

MR/A

MC/D

MC/S

ML/A

TM/S

P/A

I'd then use various shout combos to make it more or less aggressive.

[shaunwwfc]

Yeah, fluidity of the team is just dependant on the individual roles on the tactic. Im trying to find where Wwfan spoke about philosophy, but i cant, thougb maybe if you sent him or Cleon a PM they may find time to explain it better than i can, they cant do a worse job im sure

Basically, a basic role, is what it says on the tin. Basic. Other roles (advanced playmaker, poacher, libero, box to box mf etc) are specialised roles, they are not there to do a number of things, they are there to specialise in ONE thing, therefore, if you play fluid with too many specialised roles, you are giving them the freedom to try and do things they are not suited to. Giving fluidity to a team of basic roles gives them the freedom they need to perform, as in theory, without a specialisation they aren't really doing anything. Basic play needs more creativity, specialised play needs more discipline.

Also, set your TM supply to head, he may give a few flick ons, or your crosses will be aimed at him.

Thanks for clarifying that mate, your help in this thread I really do appreciate.

I have already started setting the TM 'to head'

[shaunwwfc]

I'd query your strategy. Is "counter" really the best strategy for the fast, direct British 4-4-2? I'd argue it should be attacking, very fluid or fluid, no specialist roles other than a TM and (possibly) poacher.

I'd try this:

Philosophy: Fluid

Strategy: Attacking

Adjustments: Heavier Tackling, More Direct, Less Roaming

Roles/Duties:

GK/D

FB/S

LD/D

LD/D

FB/S

MR/A

MC/D

MC/S

ML/A

TM/S

P/A

I'd then use various shout combos to make it more or less aggressive.

The simplicity of that doesn't half make it appealing. Would you literally team instruction wise suggest no other adjustments? Marking zonal or man?

I will try your template with the hit early crosses and exploit flanks shout

[wwfan]

I normally advise zonal marking as I think man marking as currently conceptualized in the ME is anachronistic.

I'd be wary about the "exploit flanks" shout as it will send your FBs a long way forward and compromise your defence. I'd keep it simple to start with.

Aggressive shouts: Get Ball Forward, Hit Early Crosses, Push Higher Up, Play Wider, Pass into Space

Cautious Shouts: Retain Possession, Drop Deeper, Play Narrower, Pass to Feet

[shaunwwfc]

I normally advise zonal marking as I think man marking as currently conceptualized in the ME is anachronistic.

I'd be wary about the "exploit flanks" shout as it will send your FBs a long way forward and compromise your defence. I'd keep it simple to start with.

Aggressive shouts: Get Ball Forward, Hit Early Crosses, Push Higher Up, Play Wider, Pass into Space

Cautious Shouts: Retain Possession, Drop Deeper, Play Narrower, Pass to Feet

Thanks wwfan.

Just to clarify, are both of those shouts with the attacking mentality? As with the aggressive shouts can the tactic be any higher up/wider?

[wwfan]

Yes, both sets with the attacking mentality. It can be a little higher up and wider, but they won't change it much. The cautious ones will produce a far bigger change.

If the passing from the back is still not direct enough for you, you could experiment with "Clear Balls to the Flanks" or "Pump Balls into Box". You might find that the former requires the wingers pushed up to the AM strata to be truly effective, which will knock onto a more exposed defence. The latter could work very well with a TM/Poacher combo, but will reduce the balls out wide. I suggest looking at the advantages your front two / wingers have over their markers to see if either might be a useful "go to" during a match. The flanks shout would suit wingers with a physical advantage and the box shout forwards with similar advantages.

[shaunwwfc]

Yes, both sets with the attacking mentality. It can be a little higher up and wider, but they won't change it much. The cautious ones will produce a far bigger change.

If the passing from the back is still not direct enough for you, you could experiment with "Clear Balls to the Flanks" or "Pump Balls into Box". You might find that the former requires the wingers pushed up to the AM strata to be truly effective, which will knock onto a more exposed defence. The latter could work very well with a TM/Poacher combo, but will reduce the balls out wide. I suggest looking at the advantages your front two / wingers have over their markers to see if either might be a useful "go to" during a match. The flanks shout would suit wingers with a physical advantage and the box shout forwards with similar advantages.

Thank you very much wwfan. Part of me is very fearful of the attacking strategy, as it may leave me very open, but sod it, this may well be my last good go at FM13, may as well Keegan it!

[wwfan]

You'll definitely be open at the back, but that's part of the gameplan you are trying to develop. I'd expect a high scoring season.

[shaunwwfc]

You'll definitely be open at the back, but that's part of the gameplan you are trying to develop. I'd expect a high scoring season.

Aslong as I see some classic direct play going forward, then bring it on!!

[Mighty Red]

agree with many of wwfan's suggestions. Another option is to have one of your wingers on support... my understanding is that when they are on attack they will look to exploit space behind the FB. On support, they will hang back in front of the FB and then look to dribble / knock it past the FB. It may help the cohesiveness and provide another option...

[shaunwwfc]

wwfan - I have had some decent results with your setup. I have gone with literally your template but put in float crosses, I found with default because it was set to Target Man, when the target man wasn't positioned well/or the cross wasn't on the Wingers would make some very random crosses.

I know you made a point of making sure stategy was set to Attacking but in the tough away games I am actually using the same attacking shouts but combining it with Counter/Standard. It seems to be going well.

Thanks again.

[wwfan]

Glad to hear it. My ideas were just a starting point. Up to you how you alter it to suit your players and vision.

Big question. Does it look like the type of British game you were after?

[shaunwwfc]

Glad to hear it. My ideas were just a starting point. Up to you how you alter it to suit your players and vision.

Big question. Does it look like the type of British game you were after?

I am currently using it with Sunderland. I have Steven Fletcher and Danny Graham in the TM/P positions and Jarvis (new signing) and Johnson out wide, it works well. I cannot play attacking every game, I quickly realised this as against higher opposition as I was getting mauled. This is where I am switching to a lower strategy and in fairness, it does work. I am hoping it does continue to because I love the simplistic, I like that it isn't over complicated because I can easily adapt to it.

Does it look like the type of British game I was after? Yes it does. Especially in home games, I am old fashioned in the sense I love seeing a solid setup and balls sprayed out wide and wingers hugging the touchline and beating there full back and sending over an inviting cross. This tactic does this, as I say its just in away games against really good opposition I am struggling, although in fairness, I would with any tactic/system because Sunderland aren't one of the best sides in the PL by any stretch.

Would the Team instructions work well with another formation? Say 4-5-1 or a deep 4-2-3-1 in games I want to pack the midfield more but still keep that same approach? If so, what roles would you recommend?

[wwfan]

If you want to frustrate the opposition, a 4-51 or 4-1-4-1 would probably be the best options. You can keep the fluid philosophy and generic role structure and use the cautious shouts. The only issue will be the lone forward, who might need to be a DLF/S to get him into the game. TMs and Poachers tend not to offer enough all round pay to be good lone forwards. You could try a TM/S and see how it goes, but be prepared to switch if he's getting isolated and losing the ball quickly.

For backs to the wall games when 0-0 is a good result, you could also use the shoot from range shout to combat the possibility of conceding on the counter. You probably won't score from a long shot, but it will reduce the chance of the opposition winning the ball and streaming forward and might win you a few corners that you can hopefully nick a goal from.

[KevMaaan]

Also, if you are heading into a tough away game where you dont think you have much of a chance, the "attacking set pieces" match prep could be an absolute blessing considering your tall cBs will be in the box as well as your targetman. Quite often ive beatenb much larger teams by a fluke corner/freekick and this kind of match prep helps so much.

EDIT:

I've also found the thing i was looking for about philosophies and player roles. This was said by Wwfan and quoted by Cleon:

wwfan helped design and create the tactics creator and here is what he classes as general and special roles;

“I consider the following to be specialist:

Target Man

Poacher

Trequartista

Advanced Playmaker

Deep Lying Playmaker

Ball Winning Midfielder

Anchor Man

Libero

These five roles can fit in either camp, depending on your interpretation.

Complete Forward

Defensive Forward

Defensive Winger

Box to Box Midfielder

Ball Playing Defender

Generic roles:

Advanced Forward

Deep Lying Forward

Attacking Midfielder

Central Midfielder

Defensive Midfielder

Inside Forward

Winger

Wide Midfielder

Wing Back

Full Back

Central Defender

Sweeper

I don’t include keepers.”

Specialist roles explain what the player does, i.e (playmaking, anchoring, poaching). Generic roles focus only on the players’ position.

Now the above are only guidelines and you can work outside of those parameters. But ideally if you are not comfortable with how the game works or find yourself struggling then you should take the above into consideration.

More generic roles require a more fluid philosophy, and more specialist roles require more discipline (rigid philosophies)

[max787]

I'd query your strategy. Is "counter" really the best strategy for the fast, direct British 4-4-2? I'd argue it should be attacking, very fluid or fluid, no specialist roles other than a TM and (possibly) poacher.

I'd try this:

Philosophy: Fluid

Strategy: Attacking

Adjustments: Heavier Tackling, More Direct, Less Roaming

Roles/Duties:

GK/D

FB/S

LD/D

LD/D

FB/S

MR/A

MC/D

MC/S

ML/A

TM/S

P/A

I'd then use various shout combos to make it more or less aggressive.

I normally advise zonal marking as I think man marking as currently conceptualized in the ME is anachronistic.

I'd be wary about the "exploit flanks" shout as it will send your FBs a long way forward and compromise your defence. I'd keep it simple to start with.

Aggressive shouts: Get Ball Forward, Hit Early Crosses, Push Higher Up, Play Wider, Pass into Space

Cautious Shouts: Retain Possession, Drop Deeper, Play Narrower, Pass to Feet

Thanks for posting this, I've been using the roles and the shouts that you suggested and it's been fantastic! Great old-fashioned play style and the results have been brilliant, I'm topping the league with spurs with 10 wins from 10 league games.

[shaunwwfc]

It has been very effective and great to watch for me too.

wwfan - can I just clarify the mr/ml - do you mean wide midfielders or wingers?

[wwfan]

It has been very effective and great to watch for me too.

wwfan - can I just clarify the mr/ml - do you mean wide midfielders or wingers?

Either/or, as Kierkegaard might say.

[Spikey]

Some great stuff in this thread. The basic versus specialist roles info has really got me thinking. Can't wait to get home and to try some of this out on my currently very tedious 442!

[shaunwwfc]

Some great stuff in this thread. The basic versus specialist roles info has really got me thinking. Can't wait to get home and to try some of this out on my currently very tedious 442!

Let me know what you come up with Spikey. Be good to try it out.

[shaunwwfc]

wwfan - the Team/Player instructions template and shouts have worked a treat for me. It has got me promoted with Wolves brilliantly. I flick between different strategies because it isnt always viable to play with an attacking strategy. However could you please advise on the midfield roles for me in the same setup but with a 5 man as apposed to a 4? I still want to play with centre midfield (defend) and central midfielder (support) as presumably this will still work but what should the other midfielder be? Should I go for someone to play in behind the main striker? Infront of the back 4? Or just another central midfielder?

[wwfan]

wwfan - the Team/Player instructions template and shouts have worked a treat for me. It has got me promoted with Wolves brilliantly. I flick between different strategies because it isnt always viable to play with an attacking strategy. However could you please advise on the midfield roles for me in the same setup but with a 5 man as apposed to a 4? I still want to play with centre midfield (defend) and central midfielder (support) as presumably this will still work but what should the other midfielder be? Should I go for someone to play in behind the main striker? Infront of the back 4? Or just another central midfielder?

I suggested fluid because you were going to employ 1 or 2 specialist roles (a target man & (possibly) a poacher). Assuming you are going to stick with the same philosophy, the same logic applies with the five man midfield. Assuming you still have a TM/S upfront, you can either make the extra midfielder a generic MC/A, in which he'll hopefully break past the TM and grab a few goals, a more creative player that feeds the wingers, or even a B2B midfielder who does a bit of everything. If you went the creative route, you could make him an AP or a DLP, depending on what you feel is a better fit. If you just want to break up the opposition's play, then a BWM.

The main thing is to have three different duties in the central midfield. You can choose the actual role depending on what game plan you have.

[shaunwwfc]

I suggested fluid because you were going to employ 1 or 2 specialist roles (a target man & (possibly) a poacher). Assuming you are going to stick with the same philosophy, the same logic applies with the five man midfield. Assuming you still have a TM/S upfront, you can either make the extra midfielder a generic MC/A, in which he'll hopefully break past the TM and grab a few goals, a more creative player that feeds the wingers, or even a B2B midfielder who does a bit of everything. If you went the creative route, you could make him an AP or a DLP, depending on what you feel is a better fit. If you just want to break up the opposition's play, then a BWM.

The main thing is to have three different duties in the central midfield. You can choose the actual role depending on what game plan you have.

Brilliant stuff.

One last thing, the lone striker when used in this system I have found works better as a deep lying forward on support - but should I set him as target man in this system?

[wwfan]

Brilliant stuff.

One last thing, the lone striker when used in this system I have found works better as a deep lying forward on support - but should I set him as target man in this system?

I usually recommend a DLF/S or CF/S for lone forward systems without an AMC, as other roles get isolated and don't contribute enough to overall play. I suggested TM/S as I knew you were using a TM and thought that role might offer just about enough, but if you've already switched to a DLF, then you've probably made the right move.

[KevMaaan]

Brilliant stuff.

One last thing, the lone striker when used in this system I have found works better as a deep lying forward on support - but should I set him as target man in this system?

From my own personal experience i have found the most effective roles for a lone striker are a DLP/CF on support. I've never really has much success with a lone TM, but thats just me. I don't try to play an old fashioned wide game so maybe thats why.

[Rupal]

Very interesting ideas here.

I've been trying a 4-2-4 for a little while and have been pleasantly surprised to actually win some matches with it. I am a sucker for old-fashioned wingers!

This is in the Blue Square North.

GK

FB (Auto) LD (D) LD (D) FB (Auto)

CM(Auto) DLP (D)

AMR (Winger (A)) AML (Winger (A))

DLF (Support) Poacher (A)

Playing Direct passing and set for play down both flanks with man marking and counter attack. Wingers instructed to hug the touchlines and cross from the byline.

Have been using mainly Attack or Control strategy (Standard if up against tough opposition) with a Balanced style.

Is anyone else daft enough to be trying a 4-2-4? So far, I'm pleased with how my useless team are playing (Histon are no Barcelona!!). Will see how it goes.

[wwfan]

Very interesting ideas here.

I've been trying a 4-2-4 for a little while and have been pleasantly surprised to actually win some matches with it. I am a sucker for old-fashioned wingers!

This is in the Blue Square North.

GK

FB (Auto) LD (D) LD (D) FB (Auto)

CM(Auto) DLP (D)

AMR (Winger (A)) AML (Winger (A))

DLF (Support) Poacher (A)

Playing Direct passing and set for play down both flanks with man marking and counter attack. Wingers instructed to hug the touchlines and cross from the byline.

Have been using mainly Attack or Control strategy (Standard if up against tough opposition) with a Balanced style.

Is anyone else daft enough to be trying a 4-2-4? So far, I'm pleased with how my useless team are playing (Histon are no Barcelona!!). Will see how it goes.

Minor query. Why a playmaker in the centre of the pitch when you are focusing your passes down the flanks and have LDs who'll clear the ball deep as much as possible? Won't play bypass him too much?

As for the 4-2-4, you can read this thread: http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/330655-4-2-4-with-2-striker-2-wingers-Did-anybody-try-it-Does-it-work

It's very similar advice to that I've given here, but for a 4-2-4.

[Rupal]

Minor query. Why a playmaker in the centre of the pitch when you are focusing your passes down the flanks and have LDs who'll clear the ball deep as much as possible? Won't play bypass him too much?

As for the 4-2-4, you can read this thread: http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/330655-4-2-4-with-2-striker-2-wingers-Did-anybody-try-it-Does-it-work

It's very similar advice to that I've given here, but for a 4-2-4.

In practice he seems to get reasonably well involved in the play. But I'll experiment with simply playing a CD (D) or maybe a BWM (D) there and see what difference that makes. The whole tactic, as you can see, is nothing if not simple!! Like me I s'pose:rolleyes:

Thanks for the link to the other thread - again some interesting posts there. What I was pleased about was my last match against a 3-5-2. I'd been a bit worried about being overwhelmed because of the midfield deficit in numbers and, of course, my assman kept whinging on about it. But we did win 3-1 and not because of better players either, which was very satisfying!

[shaunwwfc]

wwfan - do you think setting "more aggressive" on the tackling to default would have a detrimental effect to the rest of the tactic I have built upon the instructions?

I have and keep continuing to get an insane amount of red cards at the moment.

[wwfan]

wwfan - do you think setting "more aggressive" on the tackling to default would have a detrimental effect to the rest of the tactic I have built upon the instructions?

I have and keep continuing to get an insane amount of red cards at the moment.

It shouldn't do. You wanted a traditional English style tactic, which was why I suggested it.

Alternatively, you could try to reduce the cards by maintaining a professional focus in the media and team interactions, so the players are composed and professional rather than fired-up and passionate.

[shaunwwfc]

Thanks wwfan. I will look into those. This for is where "dirtiness" comes into play, I wish we could see this attribute. I am using a regen who keeps getting sent off who for I know could be a clone of Lee Cattermole.

I have to say I have been very impressed with the tactic you more or less created for me. It has basically became plug and play, I use both combination of the shouts you instructed as well as a couple of my own as I see it aswell as flickering through the stategies as I see fit. I also spotted you did an Interpretation of the Barcelona tactic on here last year, I would very much love to see more of these kind of posts from you as I am sure everyone else would. They are not only bloody good, they are helpful & interesting, good job!

[wwfan]

If I couldn't predict how the TC produces effective tactics, then I'd not have done a very good job.

As for producing detailed overviews of tactical styles, I'm afraid time-constraints are an issue. If you haven't already, it might be worth downloading Tactical Theorems '10. It has an appendix overviewing a number of tactical styles you could try out.

[shaunwwfc]

wwfan, thanks for the ever growing help you have given out in this thread, your probably sick to bloody death of me! But with the current framework I am using, combined with the shouts do you think using the lower strategies (defensive, standard, control etc) would work in the games I am huge underdog?

[wwfan]

I'm a big fan of defensive for such games, as it still counters at pace when required. I tend to use the "shoot on sight" shout in such games, especially if I've snuck a lead, as the most likely way you'll concede is on the reverse counter. Shoot on sight stops your players getting caught in possession, wastes time and can win corners, which might produce a goal or two.

[shaunwwfc]

With the "shoot on sight" and defensive stategy - would you still continue to use the original shouts which made the tactic so good on the break?

[wwfan]

With the "shoot on sight" and defensive stategy - would you still continue to use the original shouts which made the tactic so good on the break?

Up to you and how you think the match will pan out. If you genuinely think you can win by keeping things tight and being a threat on the counter, then use a shout set that should facilitate your chances of scoring. If you'd be happy with 0-0, then a different shout set.

[iMan]

I'd query your strategy. Is "counter" really the best strategy for the fast, direct British 4-4-2? I'd argue it should be attacking, very fluid or fluid, no specialist roles other than a TM and (possibly) poacher.

I'd try this:

Philosophy: Fluid

Strategy: Attacking

Adjustments: Heavier Tackling, More Direct, Less Roaming

Roles/Duties:

GK/D

FB/S

LD/D

LD/D

FB/S

MR/A

MC/D

MC/S

ML/A

TM/S

P/A

I'd then use various shout combos to make it more or less aggressive.

How could I translate this into a 4-3-3?

Say I keep the same team instructions but the roles are

Cf s

If A IF a

Cm A Cm S

Anchor Man

WB A LD LD WB A

GK

Granted I have the players could that work or is there some flaw with the system?

[SpartyOn]

How could I translate this into a 4-3-3?

Say I keep the same team instructions but the roles are

Cf s

If A IF a

Cm A Cm S

Anchor Man

WB A LD LD WB A

GK

Granted I have the players could that work or is there some flaw with the system?

That setup isn't really suited for fast, direct wide play. You've got your AML/AMR cutting in, so any width has to come from the wingbacks, who won't have much time to get forward if you're trying to play quickly.